Shelling- you might have been hearing about it a lot recently, but what is it exactly?
How is it accomplished? And why do you almost never hear it in reference to the US military?
Shelling is typically used to reference the employment of artillery during military conflict.
Artillery itself has been in use almost since the dawn of war itself, and is typically used
either in an anti-fortification or anti-personnel role. In the anti-fortification role,
artillery is employed to soften or destroy enemy defenses. Prior to World War 2 this was perhaps
the most common use of artillery thanks to the construction of large defensive works. However,
as airplanes became more advanced and were able to carry heavier bomb loads, and as tanks became more
sophisticated, large static defensive works and even trenches became untenable in modern combat.
In the anti-personnel role, artillery is employed to inflict mass casualties on an enemy army.
In ancient times this was typically achieved with the use of many small projectiles,
though even single large projectiles such as large boulders or even ballista could be devastating
against large formations of enemy troops. Today, a variety of anti-personnel artillery shells exist,
ranging from high explosive to chemical rounds. Modern artillery can also be used in area denial
operations and even to support troops with non-lethal aid. The use of cluster munition that
releases submunition rounds can deliver everything from anti-personnel to anti-vehicle mines,
and chemical rounds can deliver heavy obscuring smoke effects or even irritants-
or more lethal chemical or biological agents. The first true artillery were siege engines,
and the first of these known to historians is a catapult developed in Syracuse around 400 BC.
Before the use of gunpowder, artillery used mechanical energy to hurl large projectiles
across long distances, which severely limited their effectiveness. For example, a 1st century
BC Roman catapult could launch a 14.4 lb (6.55 kg) stone with 16,000 joules of kinetic energy,
while a mid 19th century 12 pounder gun, firing a 9 lbs (4.1 kg) round would deliver
a whopping 240,000 joules of kinetic energy. As technology improved, so did the ability to
deliver bigger and bigger ammunition over longer distances, and in the 20th century a battleship
could fire a 2,701 lbs (1,225 kg) shell at an energy level over 350,000,000 joules.
As artillery became more advanced so too did its capabilities,
and the types of ammunition that could be fired from them. Today, American artillery is capable
of firing a variety of projectiles, including: High Explosive: typically used against personnel
and static targets, and filled with a high explosive filler that can cause blast damage.
Personnel are further at risk of injury from shell casings and other debris from the blast,
causing a deadly shower of shrapnel. High Explosive Anti-Tank:
these types of rounds are specifically geared for defeating the armor of enemy vehicles. They have
traditionally been used in anti-tank artillery, guns that resemble the cannons of yesteryear more
than what you might think of as artillery today, and fire on a relatively flat trajectory. However,
modern US 'smart' rounds like the 155 mm M982 Excalibur can be fired from traditional artillery
and precisely guided onto enemy tanks even from as far as 37 miles (60 km) away! These
rounds use a jet of hot metal to punch through enemy armor and ensure a kill,
but require extreme precision to be effective. Submunition: these types of rounds are designed
to carry some kind of cargo inside, and dispersed with the use of small explosive charges that
blast the round apart at the desired target location. The cargo inside these rounds can
include cluster munitions, perfect for spreading smaller explosives over a wide area and doing
serious damage to lightly armored vehicles, enemy artillery, and personnel. Mines can also
be carried and burst high over a target area to saturate the ground below and make it incredibly
dangerous for the enemy to attempt to cross it. Chemical: These types of rounds included chemical
agents designed to be toxic, harassing, or smoke-producing.
A toxic agent can be intended to incapacitate or outright kill enemy soldiers through poisoning,
while a harassing agent is milder in nature and intended to seriously degrade the enemy's
ability to fight. VX and tear gas are two types of toxic and harassing agents, respectively.
Smoke producing agents are meant to generate a large amount of thick, voluminous smoke.
This can provide cover for friendly infantry or vehicles, and can even be used to block infrared
signatures. Alternatively, the smoke can be fired onto enemy positions to obscure their sight and
render them incapable of responding to an attack. Rocket Assisted: rocket assisted projectiles-
or RAP- are meant to greatly extend the range of artillery, and can add significant
reach to an already deadly weapon system. Practice or Inert: these types of rounds
contain only a very low explosive such as a propelling and spotting charge and used
for training. The tiny spotting charge helps trainees spot where their artillery is landing,
but does very little actual damage on the ground. Illuminating: Illumination rounds are hollow
inside, carrying a small parachute and an illuminant payload. The illuminant is designed to
burn brightly enough to shed light out in a wide area, with the parachute helping slow its descent.
While anytime large amounts of artillery is used, the act is typically referred to as
shelling, in modern wars, the term 'shelling' typically also includes the use of other types
of ground effect weapons. Cruise and ballistic missiles both can be used to wreak massive
devastation on the ground below, and much like artillery shells can be loaded with a variety
of payloads to increase their effectiveness. Ground-attack aircraft such as Russia's Sukhoi
Su-25 are also frequently used to pound enemy positions on the ground. However,
these aircraft are very vulnerable to ground fire, as they typically need to be flying low
to strike their targets- this is especially true for the Russian military given their
lack of targeting pods and smart munitions. Multiple Launch Rocket Projectors are another
form of more modern artillery, and consist of several launch tubes all loaded with high
explosive rockets. Often referred to as 'rocket artillery', these are devastating weapons against
enemy infantry because they can fire dozens of projectiles in very rapid succession.
That means that ground impacts are happening in very quick succession,
leaving enemy infantry with very little time to seek cover versus a traditional artillery barrage.
While traditional, or 'tube' artillery can manipulate its launch angle and projectile
velocity to fire multiple rounds which all hit the target in very rapid succession, it doesn't
compare to the ability of rocket artillery to completely saturate an enemy target quickly.
In essence, the term 'shelling' refers to the widespread use of delivery systems using high
explosives in rapid succession. But why will you hear it in reference to Russia's military and
rarely ever in reference to the US military? That's down to different warfighting
methodologies. The Russian military is less technologically sophisticated and has a much
smaller budget, thus it must rely on traditional artillery for fire support missions. Without
a significant smart weapons capability, the Russian military must also rely on overwhelming
force to achieve its objectives, thus requiring massive and prolonged artillery bombardments.
The American military on the other hand, while still having a robust artillery corps,
is far more technologically advanced and has the world's largest stockpile of smart munitions.
Rather than expending dozens of rounds to ensure the destruction of a high value target,
the American military can instead use a much more mobile and flexible air asset with a
single smart munition to achieve the same effect. Precision means less waste and greater lethality,
but it also comes with the added bonus of causing significantly less collateral damage.
That's why when you compare collateral damage caused by Russian military action
versus American military action, the difference is astronomical.